RE: Draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Relating to Civil or Commercial Matters
|
|
- Melvin Payne
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 July 19, 2017 John J. KIM, Assistant Legal Adviser U.S. Department of State 2201 "C" Street, N.W. WASHINGTON, DC Joseph Matal Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 600 Dulaney St., Madison West, 10 th Fl. Alexandria, VA Maria Pagan Deputy General Counsel Office of the United States Trade Representative th Street, NW Washington, D.C RE: Draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Dear Mr. Kim, Mr. Matal and Ms. Pagan: Further to your Request for Comments and Notice of Public Meeting on a Preliminary Draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Currently Being Negotiated at The Hague Conference on Private International Law (81 Fed. Reg , November 18, 2016), the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) 1 and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) are providing the following views on whether patents should be included within the scope of the Draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Relating to Civil or Commercial matters 1 This letter adds to comments AIPLA submitted in response to the Federal Register notice on January 17, While those comments referred to all forms of intellectual property, including patent, trademarks, copyright and trade secret, this letter focuses on the Draft Convention as it relates to patents only.
2 Page 2 of 5 (Draft Convention). Having further considered the February 2017 version of the Draft Convention, we believe patents should be excluded from the scope of the convention. AIPLA is a national bar association of approximately 13,500 members who are primarily lawyers engaged in private or corporate practice, in government service, and in the academic community. AIPLA members represent a wide and diverse spectrum of individuals, companies, and institutions involved directly or indirectly in the practice of patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, and unfair competition law, as well as other fields of law affecting intellectual property. Our members represent both owners and users of intellectual property. Our mission includes helping to establish and maintain fair and effective laws and policies that stimulate and reward invention while balancing the public's interest in healthy competition, reasonable costs, and basic fairness. PhRMA represents leading biopharmaceutical innovators in the United States. PhRMA member companies and the more than 850,000 women and men they employ across the country are devoted to inventing, manufacturing and distributing valuable medicines that enable people to live longer, healthier and more productive lives. The U.S. biopharmaceutical industry is the world leader in medical research producing more than half the world s new molecules in the last decade. In 2015 alone, the industry supported 4.5 million American jobs, produced over $1 trillion in economic output for the United States and invested almost $60 billion in research and development for new medicines. Innovators in this critical sector depend on strong intellectual property protection and enforcement at home and abroad. We question whether the Draft Convention adequately takes into account the particular territorial nature of patent rights and whether it sufficiently respects the established international framework within which patent law functions. Among the specific concerns that AIPLA and PhRMA have about including patents within the scope of the Draft Convention are the following: 1) Whether the Draft Convention takes into consideration that the scope of patentable subject matter differs from State to State, and whether a requested State would be required to enforce a judgment of infringement with respect to an invention that is unpatentable in that State. The issues that this lack of clarity raises are considerable. For example, it leaves open the possibility that a State would be required to enforce a judgment even if that State had previously rejected a patent application or invalidated a previously granted patent for the same invention. Similarly, it raises the possibility that the Draft Convention would require a court to enforce a judgment for infringement when the acts that gave rise to the judgment were not infringing acts in the requested State. The failure of the Draft Convention to address those and similar issues is compounded by the language of the Draft Convention itself. Draft Article 4(2) provides that there shall be no review of the merits of the judgment given by the court of origin. It is not inconceivable, therefore, that the Draft Convention would require U.S. courts to enforce judgments that are contrary to U.S. law.
3 Page 3 of 5 2) The Draft Convention provides in Article 26(1) that its provisions should be interpreted so far as possible to be compatible with other treaties. Insofar as the Draft Convention does not require full compliance with the network of treaties (TRIPS, NAFTA, Paris, PCT, PLT, bilateral agreements) that set procedural and substantive standards of protection for patents, the convention raises the specter that a requested State may be required to enforce a judgment that contravenes treaty law. The Draft Convention also leaves unanswered the question whether the courts of a requested State would have jurisdiction to review the conformity of a judgment with the terms of a treaty. If the Draft Convention were interpreted to limit that jurisdiction, a court of a requested State might be forced to choose between violating the terms of the Draft Convention or violating the terms of an IP treaty. 3) The question of jurisdiction raises other issues, in particular with respect to U.S. law. In the absence of implementing legislation, it is unclear whether federal or state courts would have jurisdiction to enforce judgments under the Draft Convention. The convention also ignores the issue of geographic jurisdiction. As a matter of constitutional law, the need to determine what minimum contacts, if any, would be required to bring an enforcement action before a particular court is crucial. It would also appear that forum shopping could become an issue unless clear guidelines were in place. 4) The Draft Convention provides that a foreign judgment is enforceable only if it was issued by a court. However, in some countries (Germany, for example), infringement actions are bifurcated and the question of infringement is determined by a court, but the question of validity is determined by an administrative body. Such systems are not addressed in the Draft Convention. As a result, it is unclear whether the Draft Convention would prevent a judgment of infringement from being enforced before an administrative body has ruled on validity or whether the convention grants the court of a requested State the power to refuse to enforce a judgment because an administrative body in the State of origin has determined the patent to be invalid or has not yet issued its determination. 5) The U.S. is one of the few jurisdictions that provides jury trials in patent infringement cases; in the vast majority of States, judges rule on patent matters. The Draft Convention does not distinguish between the two types of trials, but as jury trials occasionally come under criticism by countries that do not provide for them, it is potentially troublesome that the Draft Convention fails to expressly provide for equal treatment of judgments rendered by juries and judges, respectively. 6) Draft Article 12 would provide that non-monetary remedies are not enforceable under the Draft Convention. There is broad disparity in the amount of monetary damages that States award. Monetary damages tend to be minimal in many States compared to the size of damages in countries like the U.S., and monetary damages in the U.S. tend to be greater than in any other State.
4 Page 4 of 5 The Draft Convention is silent with respect to the size and scope of damage awards, but geographical differences may pose serious challenges to the operation of the convention. For example, a court in a State that tends to grant large awards may consider it contrary to public policy to enforce a monetary judgment that it considers grossly insufficient, just as a court in a State that tends to grant small awards may consider it contrary to public policy to enforce a monetary judgment that it considers excessive. 7) Article 5(1)(k) provides that a judgment on the infringement of a patent or similar right falls within the scope of eligibility of the Draft Convention. Some States provide for the grant of utility models or design patents (which could be considered a similar right ), while many others do not. The broad language of Article 5(1)(k) thus raises the issue of whether the Draft Convention would require a State to enforce a foreign judgment for infringement of a utility model or a design patent when the requested State does not provide for those types of rights. Would, for example a judgment for infringement of a U.S. design patent be enforced in an EU country, which grants registered design rights but not design patents? Similarly, would a U.S. court be required to enforce a Chinese judgment for utility model infringement although the U.S. does not grant utility model protection? Unfortunately, the Draft Convention does not provide clear responses to these important questions. 8) The Draft Convention is particularly troublesome because extraterritorial enforcement of patent rights has not traditionally played a role in the international patent system. While a considerable number of treaties broadly define those inventions eligible for patents, patent enforcement is considered a matter of national law. The principle of independence of patents is enshrined in the Paris Convention, infringement litigation takes place on a State-by-State basis, the Patent Cooperation Treaty expressly provides that substantive conditions of patent law are to be determined by each State, and States do not give full faith and credit to the patent determinations of other States. It is therefore worrisome that, without due deliberation and consideration for the particular patent issues at stake, the Draft Convention may significantly impact long-standing patent law principles. 9) AIPLA and PhRMA believe that many of the foregoing concerns would be expressed by other organizations and entities in the United States and abroad that have an expertise in and thus, an interest in the proper protection and enforcement of patent rights, should they be consulted on this matter. We feel that the considerations of these complex issues would benefit from more time and additional outreach to informed and invested patent system stakeholders, both in the United States and other industrial countries with mature patent systems. Our current sense is that this exercise would conclude that patent judgments should be expressly excluded from the scope of applicability of the Draft Convention. In sum, AIPLA and PhRMA are concerned that the risks and unintended consequences of granting recognition of foreign judgments in patent infringement matters will outweigh any potential benefit. AIPLA and PhRMA therefore believe that patents should be excluded from the
5 Page 5 of 5 scope of applicability of the Draft Convention, and asks the U.S. to advocate for the adoption of draft Article 2(1)(l), which is currently in square brackets in the text of February 17, We thank you for allowing AIPLA and PhRMA the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, Mark L. Whitaker President American Intellectual Property Law Association Chris Moore Deputy Vice President, International Affairs Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America CC: Timothy SCHNABEL Attorney-Adviser Office of the Legal Adviser U.S. Department of State schnabeltr@state.gov Shira Perlmutter Chief Policy Officer and Director for International Affairs U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Shira.Perlmutter@USPTO.GOV John J. Strickler Chief Counsel for Negotiations, Legislation and Administrative Law Office of the U.S. Trade Representative John_Strickler@ustr.eop.gov Elizabeth Kendall Acting Assistant USTR for Innovation and Intellectual Property Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Elizabeth_L_Kendall@ustr.eop.gov
April 30, Dear Acting Under Secretary Rea:
The Honorable Teresa S. Rea Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Mail Stop OPEA P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA
More informationAugust 6, AIPLA Comments on Partial Amendment of Guidelines for the Use of Intellectual Property Under the Antimonopoly Act (Draft)
Person in Charge of the Partial Amendment of the IP Guidelines (Draft) Consultation and Guidance Office, Trade Practices Division Economic Affairs Bureau, Secretariat, Japan Fair Trade Commission Section
More informationTrademark Rights; Overview of Provisions in the Paris Convention and the TRIPS Agreement
Trademark Rights; Overview of Provisions in the Paris Convention and the TRIPS Agreement Geneva, 15 March 2012 Octavio Espinosa WIPO Nature of IP Rights Intellectual property (IP) confers a right to exclude
More informationAIPLA S Comments on the Revision of the Trademark Law of the People s Republic of China 商标法修改公开征集意见
to 商标局法律处 ] VIA EMAIL (sbjlaw@saic.gov.cn) Re: AIPLA S Comments on the Revision of the Trademark Law of the People s Republic of China 商标法修改公开征集意见 Dear Sir or Madam: The American Intellectual Property
More informationWIPO Sub-Regional Workshop on Patent Policy and its Legislative Implementation
WIPO Sub-Regional Workshop on Patent Policy and its Legislative Implementation Topic 12: Patent-related provisions in the framework of preferential trade agreements Marco M. ALEMAN Deputy Director, Patent
More informationThe World Intellectual Property Organization
The World Intellectual Property Organization The World Intellectual Property Organization is an international organization dedicated to ensuring that the rights of creators and owners of intellectual property
More informationWIPO Circular C. PCT 1372, concerning Proposed Modification to the PCT Receiving Office Guidelines, February 20, 2013
The Honorable James Pooley Deputy Director General, Innovation and Technology Sector World Intellectual Property Organization 34, chemin des Colombettes 1211 Geneva 20 SWITZERLAND Via email: claus.matthes@wipo.int
More informationJudicial training in the framework of the Unified Patent Court as a prerequisite for the success of the Unitary Patent System
ERA Forum (2015) 16:1 6 DOI 10.1007/s12027-015-0378-z EDITORIAL Judicial training in the framework of the Unified Patent Court as a prerequisite for the success of the Unitary Patent System Florence Hartmann-Vareilles
More informationWORKSHOP 1: IP INFRINGEMENT AND INTERNATIONAL FORUM SHOPPING
43 rd World Intellectual Property Congress Seoul, Korea WORKSHOP 1: IP INFRINGEMENT AND INTERNATIONAL FORUM SHOPPING October 21, 2012 John Kim* Admitted to practice in Maryland, the District of Columbia,
More informationPatents in Europe 2016/2017. Helping business compete in the global economy
In association with Greece Maria Athanassiadou and Henning Voelkel Dr Helen G Papaconstantinou and Partners Patents in Europe 2016/2017 Helping business compete in the global economy Dr Helen G Papaconstantinou
More informationANNEX VI REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 24 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
ANNEX VI REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 24 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ANNEX VI REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 24 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TITLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Definition of Intellectual
More information[English translation by WIPO] Questionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights
Questionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights The answers to this questionnaire have been provided on behalf of: Country: Chile... Office: National Institute of Industrial Property (INAPI)...
More informationRecognized Group Thailand Report
Recognized Group Thailand Report Asian Patent Attorneys Association 58 th Council Meeting Jeju, Korea Updates Paris Convention Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Madrid Protocol Number of Applications Classified
More informationJanuary 15, Dear Minister Gaviria,
January 15, 2018 The Honorable Alejandro Gaviria Uribe Minister of Health and Social Protection Republic of Colombia Carrera 13 No. 32-76, piso 1 Bogotá. Código Postal 110311 Dear Minister Gaviria, On
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case: 16-1284 Document: 173 Page: 1 Filed: 07/14/2017 2016-1284, -1787 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit HELSINN HEALTHCARE S.A., v. Plaintiff-Appellee, TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC.,
More informationIndonesia. Contributing firm George Widjojo & Partners. Author George Widjojo Senior Partner
Indonesia Contributing firm George Widjojo & Partners Author George Widjojo Senior Partner 171 Indonesia George Widjojo & Partners 1. Legal framework National Indonesia has granted legal protection to
More informationPatent Cooperation Treaty
American University of Beirut From the SelectedWorks of Juan Lapenne Spring August 19, 2010 Patent Cooperation Treaty Juan Lapenne Available at: https://works.bepress.com/juan_lapenne/1/ 1 PATENT COOPERATION
More informationRequest for Comments on a Patent Small Claims Proceeding in the United States
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 12/18/2012 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2012-30483, and on FDsys.gov [3510-16-P] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United
More informationGood afternoon, Please acknowledge receipt by return . Thank you, Erin Sheehan Policy Assistant
From: Erin Sheehan Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 1:54 PM To: fitf_rules; fitf_guidance Cc: Todd Dickinson; Vincent Garlock; James Crowne; Claire Lauchner Subject: First Inventor to File Proposed Rules
More informationUS-China Business Council Comments on the Draft Measures for the Compulsory Licensing of Patents
US-China Business Council Comments on the Draft Measures for the Compulsory Licensing of Patents The US-China Business Council (USCBC) and its member companies appreciate the opportunity to submit comments
More informationMULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS THE URUGUAY ROUND
MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS THE URUGUAY ROUND RESTRICTED 7 July 1988 Special Distribution Group of Negotiations on Goods (GATI) Negotiating Group on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights,
More informationIntellectual Property Rights in the Sultanate of Oman
[Type a quote from the document or the summary of an interesting point. You can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Text Box Tools tab to change the formatting of the pull quote text
More informationQuestionnaire 2. HCCH Judgments Project
Questionnaire 2 HCCH Judgments Project Introduction 1) An important current project of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) is the development of a convention on the recognition and
More informationComments on: Request for Comments on Preparation of Patent Applications, 78 Fed. Reg (January 15, 2013)
The Honorable Teresa Stanek Rea Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office United States Patent and Trademark Office
More informationDeveloping an International IP strategy. Leslie Prichard UK Chartered & European Patent Attorney European Design Attorney culverstons
Developing an International IP strategy Leslie Prichard UK Chartered & European Patent Attorney European Design Attorney culverstons Introduction Brief overview of IP rights Patents: developing a strategy
More informationMr. Benoît Battistelli President European Patent Office Bob-van-Benthem-Platz Munich Via
Mr. Benoît Battistelli President European Patent Office Bob-van-Benthem-Platz 1 80469 Munich GERMANY Via email: president@epo.org Re: Restructuring Dear President Battistelli: I write on behalf of the
More informationRe: JIPA Comments on the Proposed Enhanced Examination Timing Control Initiative in the United States
JAPAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSOCIATION Asahi-Seimei Otemachi Bldg. 18F. Tel: 81 3 5205 3433 6-1, Otemachi 2-Chome Fax:81 3 5205 3391 Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0004 JAPAN August 20, 2010 Hon. David J. Kappos
More informationSPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR FOREIGN PLAINTIFFS IN IP LITIGATION IN CHINA
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR FOREIGN PLAINTIFFS IN IP LITIGATION IN CHINA GLOBAL LAW OFFICE www.glo.com.cn MEPH JIA GUI PARTNER THE 4TH ANNUAL US-CHINA IP CONFERENCE: BEST PRACTICES FOR INNOVATION AND CREATIVITY
More informationQuestionnaire 2. HCCH Judgments Project
Questionnaire 2 HCCH Judgments Project National/Regional Group: ISRAEL Contributors name(s): Tal Band, Yair Ziv E-Mail contact: yairz@s-horowitz.com Questions (1) With respect to Question no. 1 (Relating
More informationQuestionnaire 2. HCCH Judgments Project
Questionnaire 2 HCCH Judgments Project Introduction 1) An important current project of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) is the development of a convention on the recognition and
More informationClaims and Determining Scope of Protection
Introduction 2014 APAA Patents Committee Questionnaire Claims and Determining Scope of Protection for Taiwan Group Many practitioners and users of the patent system believe that it is a fairly universal
More informationCROSS-BORDER ENFORCEMENT OF PATENTS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO STANFORD LAW SCHOOL AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY
CROSS-BORDER ENFORCEMENT OF PATENTS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO STANFORD LAW SCHOOL AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
More informationANNEX VII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 25 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
ANNEX VII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 25 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ANNEX VII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 25 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Definition of Intellectual
More informationProposal for a COUNCIL DECISION
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 27.7.2018 COM(2018) 350 final 2018/0214 (NLE) Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the accession of the European Union to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations
More informationPROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
PROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION The idea of a Community Patent, a single patent that can be enforced throughout the European Union (EU), is hardly new. The original
More informationHow patents work An introduction for law students
How patents work An introduction for law students 1 Learning goals The learning goals of this lecture are to understand: the different types of intellectual property rights available the role of the patent
More informationQUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PATENT SYSTEM IN EUROPE. 1.1 Do you agree that these are the basic features required of the patent system?
QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PATENT SYSTEM IN EUROPE Section 1 1.1 Do you agree that these are the basic features required of the patent system? - We agree that clear substantive rules on patentability should
More informationTITLE: IrDA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY
Board Policy No. 113 TITLE: IrDA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY Intellectual Property Rights Approval Date: 10/21/99 Revision Date: 06/05/02 Existing Policies Affected: IrDA requires that IrDA standards
More informationFebruary 11, Re: Unitary Patent Post Grant Fees. Dear Dr. Fröhlinger:
Dr. Margot Fröhlinger Principal Director Patent Law and Multilateral Affairs European Patent Office Bob-van-Benthem-Platz 1 80469 Munich, GERMANY Via email: mfroehlinger@epo.org Re: Unitary Patent Post
More informationChapter 1 DEFINITION OF TERMS. There are various types of IP rights. They can be categorized as:
Chapter 1 DEFINITION OF TERMS There are various types of IP rights. They can be categorized as: Patents of invention Utility model patents Industrial design patents Trademarks Copyrights Trade secrets
More informationINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS AMENDMENT (RAISING THE BAR ACT) 2012
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS AMENDMENT (RAISING THE BAR ACT) 2012 AUTHOR: MICHAEL CAINE - PARTNER, DAVIES COLLISON CAVE Michael is a fellow and council member of the Institute of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys
More informationThe Parties exchanged views and sought clarifications on, amongst others, the following issues:
On Friday 24 th February 2012, a full day meeting was held at the Directorate- General for Trade (DG Trade), in Brussels, between the delegations of European Union and Thailand. The Thai delegation was
More informationParis Article 2 National Treatment
Paris Article 2 National Treatment (1) Nationals of any country of the Union shall, as regards the protection of industrial property, enjoy in all the other countries of the Union the advantages that their
More informationForeign Patent Law. Why file foreign? Why NOT file foreign? Richard J. Melker
Foreign Patent Law Richard J. Melker Why file foreign? Medical device companies seek worldwide protection (US ~50% of market) Patents are only enforceable in the issued country Must have patent protection
More informationComments on Proposed Rules: Changes to Practice for the Examination of Claims in Patent Applications 71 Fed. Reg. 61 (January 3, 2006)
April 24, 2006 The Honorable Jon Dudas Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Mail Stop Comments P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA
More informationMODULE. Conclusion. ESTIMATED TIME: 3 hours
MODULE 11 Conclusion ESTIMATED TIME: 3 hours 1 Overview I. MODULE 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE WTO SUMMARY... 3 II. MODULE 2 INTRODUCTION TO THE TRIPS AGREEMENT SUMMARY... 5 III. MODULE 3 COPYRIGHT AND RELATED
More informationAdvisory Committee on Enforcement
E WIPO/ACE/12/8 REV. ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 2017 Advisory Committee on Enforcement Twelfth Session Geneva, September 4 to 6, 2017 THE WORK OF THE HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL
More informationWorld Intellectual Property Organization
WIPO Special Update on WIPO Alternative Dispute Resolution GRUR Annual Meeting Hamburg September 27-30, 2017 Erik Wilbers, WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center World Intellectual Property Organization
More informationRUSSIA Patent Law #3517-I of September 23, 1992, as amended by the federal law 22-FZ of February 7, 2003 ENTRY INTO FORCE: March 11, 2003
RUSSIA Patent Law #3517-I of September 23, 1992, as amended by the federal law 22-FZ of February 7, 2003 ENTRY INTO FORCE: March 11, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I General Provisions Article 1 Relations
More informationIntellectual property rights intensive industries: contribution to economic performance and employment in Czech Republic
Intellectual property rights intensive industries: contribution to economic performance and employment in Czech Republic A joint project between the European Patent Office and the Office for Harmonization
More informationWHAT IS A PATENT AND WHAT DOES IT PROTECT?
WHAT IS A PATENT AND WHAT DOES IT PROTECT? A patent is a monopoly granted by the government for an invention that works or functions differently from other inventions. It is necessary for the invention
More informationIP system and latest developments in China. Beijing Sanyou Intellectual Property Agency Ltd. June, 2015
IP system and latest developments in China Beijing Sanyou Intellectual Property Agency Ltd. June, 205 Main Content. Brief introduction of China's legal IP framework 2. Patent System in China: bifurcated
More informationThe Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA)
POLICY BRIEF SEPTEMBER 2011 no. 184 The Comprehensive Patent Reform of 2011 Navigating the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act John Villasenor The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) approved in September
More informationUkrainian IP System & Most Topical Issues of Trademark Protection in Ukraine
Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine Ukrainian IP System & Most Topical Issues of Trademark Protection in Ukraine Vilnius, 30 November, 2018 1 1 Reform of IP State Administration System
More informationSUMMARIES OF CONVENTIONS, TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ADMINISTERED BY WIPO I2006
SUMMARIES OF CONVENTIONS, TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ADMINISTERED BY WIPO I2006 WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION SUMMARIES OF CONVENTIONS, TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ADMINISTERED BY WIPO I2006 WORLD
More informationAttachment: Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People s Republic of China
March 31, 2009 To: Legislative Affairs Office State Council People s Republic of China Hirohiko Usui President Japan Intellectual Property Association Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing
More informationChanging Landscape, US and Abroad 2017 In House Counsel Conference
TRADE SECRETS Changing Landscape, US and Abroad 2017 In House Counsel Conference Presenters: Jenny Papatolis Johnson Endo Pharmaceuticals Tracy Zurzolo Quinn Reed Smith LLP Matthew P. Frederick Reed Smith
More informationANNEX XVII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
ANNEX XVII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ANNEX XVII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Definition of Intellectual
More information7 Problems Surrounding Intellectual Property Rights under Private International Law
7 Problems Surrounding Intellectual Property Rights under Private International Law Despite the prospected increase in intellectual property (IP) disputes beyond national borders, there are no established
More informationCountry Presentation 1
Country Presentation 1 Overview of AIDS Situation First HIV case detected in Dec. 1990. Reported cases: 84,484 (0.08% population); 13,315 have developed AIDS; 7,595 have died (Aug. 2004) Estimate for infection
More informationAbstract. Keywords. Kotaro Kageyama. Kageyama International Law & Patent Firm, Tokyo, Japan
Beijing Law Review, 2014, 5, 114-129 Published Online June 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/blr http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/blr.2014.52011 Necessity, Criteria (Requirements or Limits) and Acknowledgement
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims. Mr. Antonio Ray ORTIGUERA Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices Philippines
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: PHILIPPINES Second medical use or indication claims Mr. Alex Ferdinand FIDER Mr. Antonio Ray ORTIGUERA Angara Abello
More informationClient Privilege in Intellectual Property Advice
Client Privilege in Intellectual Property Advice Prepared by the Commission on Intellectual Property I The WIPO/AIPPI Conference on 22-23 May 2008 1. Client privilege in intellectual property advice was
More informationRESPONSE TO. Questionnaire. On the patent system in Europe INTRODUCTION
RESPONSE TO Questionnaire On the patent system in Europe INTRODUCTION PRIVACY STATEMENT I do consent to the publication of my personal data or data relating to my organisation with the publication of my
More informationRecent Developments in IP Enforcement in Korea
Recent Developments in IP Enforcement in Korea AIPPI Forum 2007 Session I October 5, 2007 Raffles City Convention Center, Singapore Casey Kook-Chan An Statutory Regime for IP Protection AIPPI-KOREA Statutory
More informationWIRELESS INNOVATION FORUM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS POLICY. As approved on 10 November, 2016
WInnForum Policy On Intellectual Property Rights: WINNF Policy 007 1. IPR Generally 1.1 Purpose WIRELESS INNOVATION FORUM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS POLICY As approved on 10 November, 2016 The Software
More informationJapan Japon Japan. Report Q174. in the name of the Japanese Group
Japan Japon Japan Report Q174 in the name of the Japanese Group Jurisdiction and applicable law in the case of cross-border infringement (infringing acts) of intellectual property rights I. The state of
More informationGuide to WIPO Services
World Intellectual Property Organization Guide to WIPO Services Helping you protect inventions, trademarks & designs resolve domain name & other IP disputes The World Intellectual Property Organization
More informationThis document gives a brief summary of the patent application process. The attached chart shows the most common patent protection routes.
The patent system Introduction This document gives a brief summary of the patent application process. The attached chart shows the most common patent protection routes. Patents protect ideas and concepts
More informationSpain Espagne Spanien. Report Q192. in the name of the Spanish Group. Acquiescence (tolerance) to infringement of Intellectual Property Rights
Spain Espagne Spanien Report Q192 in the name of the Spanish Group Acquiescence (tolerance) to infringement of Intellectual Property Rights Questions 1) The Groups are invited to indicate if their system
More informationComments on Proposed Changes to Restriction Practice in Patent Applications
Via Electronic Mail Restriction_Comments@uspto.gov Mr. Robert Stoll Commissioner for Patents Mail Stop Comments Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313 1450 Re: Comments on Proposed Changes to Restriction
More information... Revision,
Revision Table of Contents Table of Contents K Table of Contents Abbreviations... XXIII Introduction... XXVII Part 1: Protection of Intellectual Property Rights Chapter 1: Patents and Utility Models...
More informationKey Legal Insights for Exporters
Key Legal Insights for Exporters Trent Sutton Littler Mendelson P.C. Eric Schultz Barclay Damon Sam Wu Morningside Translations HOSTED BY PRESENTED BY Insight: International Law Rochester June 2016 INTRODUCTION:
More informationANNEX XV REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 7 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
ANNEX XV REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 7 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ANNEX XV REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 7 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Definition of Intellectual
More informationArticle 30. Exceptions to Rights Conferred
1 ARTICLE 30... 1 1.1 Text of Article 30... 1 1.2 General... 1 1.3 "limited exceptions"... 2 1.4 "do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent"... 3 1.5 "do not unreasonably prejudice
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims. [Please insert name last name in CAPITAL letters please]
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: New Zealand Second medical use or indication claims Michael BROWN, Partner Helen BELLCHAMBERS, Associate A J Park [Please
More informationUtilization of Prior Art Evidence on TK: Opportunities and Possibilities in the International Patent System
Utilization of Prior Art Evidence on TK: Opportunities and Possibilities in the International Patent System New Delhi, India March 23 2011 Begoña Venero Aguirre Head, Genetic Resources and Traditional
More informationIxANVL Binary License Agreement
IxANVL Binary License Agreement This IxANVL Binary License Agreement (this Agreement ) is a legal agreement between you (a business entity and not an individual) ( Licensee ) and Ixia, a California corporation
More informationAUSTRALIA Patents Act 1990 Compilation date: 24 February 2017 Includes amendments up to: Act No. 61, 2016 Registered: 27 February 2017
AUSTRALIA Patents Act 1990 Compilation date: 24 February 2017 Includes amendments up to: Act No. 61, 2016 Registered: 27 February 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introductory 1 Short title 2 Commencement
More informationINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWYERS ASSOCIATION Response to the Questionnaire on the Patent System in Europe Introduction: Who IPLA Are The Intellectual Property Lawyers Association (previously known as the
More informationREGULATION ON PROVIDING THE APPLICATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS. Article 1. Article 2
Based on items 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Decision on Declaration of the Independence of the Republic of Montenegro (RM Official Gazette No. 36/06), the Government of the Republic of Montenegro, at the session
More informationAPAA Country Report KOREA APAA Council Meeting Penang 2014
APAA Country Report KOREA APAA Council Meeting Penang 2014 1. IP Statistics in Year 2013 1 1.1. Number of applications filed with KIPO in 2013 Year Patents Utility Model Design Trademarks Total 66,940
More informationRe: In the Matter of Robert Bosch GmbH, FTC File No
The Honorable Donald S. Clark, Secretary Federal Trade Commission 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 Re: In the Matter of Robert Bosch GmbH, FTC File No. 121-0081 Dear Secretary Clark: The
More informationHereinafter, the parties will be referred to as Synthon and Astellas.
DISTRICT COURT Civil Law Section Case number/cause list number: 156096 / KG ZA 07-304 Judgment in preliminary relief proceedings In the action between SYNTHON B.V., a private company with limited liability
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION GREAT NORTHERN CORPORATION, 395 Stroebe Road Appleton, Wisconsin 54914 v. Plaintiff, TIMELY INVENTIONS, LLC, A Delaware Limited
More informationQUESTION 89. Harmonization of certain provisions of the legal systems for protecting inventions
QUESTION 89 Harmonization of certain provisions of the legal systems for protecting inventions Yearbook 1989/II, pages 324-329 Executive Committee of Amsterdam, June 4-10, 1989 Q89 Question Q89 Harmonisation
More informationAIPPI World Intellectual Property Congress, Toronto. Workshop V. Patenting computer implemented inventions. Wednesday, September 17, 2014
AIPPI World Intellectual Property Congress, Toronto Workshop V Patenting computer implemented inventions Wednesday, September 17, 2014 Implications of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank (United States Supreme Court
More informationNew Law Creates a Patent Infringement Defense and Restructures the Patent and Trademark Office Pat Costello
New Law Creates a Patent Infringement Defense and Restructures the Patent and Trademark Office Pat Costello On November 29, 1999, President Clinton signed a bill containing the American Inventors Protection
More informationFUTURE PATENT POLICY IN EUROPE PUBLIC HEARING 12 JULY European Commission "Charlemagne" Room S3 Rue de la Loi 170 Brussels REPORT
FUTURE PATENT POLICY IN EUROPE PUBLIC HEARING 12 JULY 2006 European Commission "Charlemagne" Room S3 Rue de la Loi 170 Brussels REPORT On July 12, DG Internal Market and Services held its public hearing
More informationPHILIPPINES RULES & REGULATIONS ON VOLUNTARY LICENSING October 02, 1998
PHILIPPINES RULES & REGULATIONS ON VOLUNTARY LICENSING October 02, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 DEFINITIONS Rule 1 Definition of Terms Rule 2 Prohibited Clauses Rule 3 Mandatory Provisions PART 2 REGISTRATION
More informationEUROPEAN GENERIC MEDICINES ASSOCIATION
EUROPEAN GENERIC MEDICINES ASSOCIATION POSITION PAPER POSITION PAPER ON THE REVIEW OF DIRECTIVE 2004/48/EC ON THE ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS JUNE 2011 EGA EUROPEAN GENERIC MEDICINES ASSOCIATION
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case: 13-1564 Document: 138 140 Page: 1 Filed: 03/10/2015 2013-1564 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit SCA HYGIENE PRODUCTS AKTIEBOLOG AND SCA PERSONAL CARE INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
More informationPatent reform package - Frequently Asked Questions
EUROPEAN COMMISSION MEMO Brussels, 11 December 2012 Patent reform package - Frequently Asked Questions I. Presentation of the unitary patent package 1. What is the 'unitary patent package'? The 'unitary
More informationRevision Draft of the Patent Law of the People s Republic of China (For Deliberation)
Revision Draft of the Patent Law of the People s Republic of China (For Deliberation) (Words in bold font are revised portion) Chapter 1: General Provisions Article 1 This law is enacted for the purpose
More informationUNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner v. CHANBOND, LLC Patent Owner
Paper 29 Filed: April 25, 2018 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner v. CHANBOND, LLC Patent Owner PATENT OWNER CHANBOND, LLC
More informationCompilation date: 24 February Includes amendments up to: Act No. 61, Registered: 27 February 2017
Patents Act 1990 No. 83, 1990 Compilation No. 41 Compilation date: 24 February 2017 Includes amendments up to: Act No. 61, 2016 Registered: 27 February 2017 This compilation includes commenced amendments
More informationIntellectual Property in the New Era in the GCC States: Enforcement and Opportunity
Workshop 5 Intellectual Property in the New Era in the GCC States: Enforcement and Opportunity Workshop Directors: Alhanoof Al Debasi Lecturer, Department of Law College of Business and Administration
More informationChina Intellectual Properly News
LEGAL LANGUAGE SERVICES A n affiliateofalsinternationalt e l e p h o n e (212)766-4111 18 John Street T o l l Free (800) 788-0450 Suite 300 T e l e f a x (212) 349-0964 New York, NY 10038 w v, r w l e
More informationU.S. Patent and Trademark Office Issues Proposed Rules for Post-Issuance Patent Review under the America Invents Act
February 16, 2012 Practice Groups: Intellectual Property Intellectual Property Litigation U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Issues Proposed Rules for Post-Issuance Patent Review under the America Invents
More informationDraft 2 Hanoi, 2006 DECREE
THE GOVERNMENT No. /2006/ND - CP THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM Independence Freedom Happiness ------------------------------ Draft 2 Hanoi, 2006 DECREE Making detailed provisions and providing guidelines
More information